- This topic has 1 reply, 7 voices, and was last updated 15 years, 9 months ago by
.
-
Posts
-
Lets go back to basics and not get blinded by all the secondary effects, which does not imply that they are unimportant. The first question is; do we believe in the “natural rights” of mankind as articulated in the Declaration of Independence? That we have a God given right to Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness (which to the founders meant the pursuit of private property). And further in that historic document, that the Purpose of government is to secure those rights. There is nothing in there about guaranteeing outcomes, taking care of the citizens personal needs, providing health care, etc, etc. Those who understand and embrace Liberty agree with these unalienable rights. The collectivist does not.
The next place to look is the constitution itself, whose purpose was to limit the power of the federal government, not the states or the people. The “chains” of the constitution were intended to “bind” the ruling class from becoming a tyranny. Artice I states that the government only has authority in those matters specifically spelled out in detail, and it is a basic principle of law that what is not included is specifically excluded. No wiggle room.
Chief Justice Marshall in McCulloch v. Maryland: ‘This government is acknowledged by all, to be one of enumerated powers. The principle, that it can exercise only the powers granted to it, would seem too apparent, to have required to be enforced by all those arguments, which its enlightened friends, while it was depending before the people, found it necessary to urge; that principle is now universally admitted.’
So, the first step is for the feds to stop doing anything that cannot be found in the text of the constitution. It is through overstepping its bounds legislatively and through the fraud of the implementation of the tax laws that the power brokers are able to manipulate the whole system to their own devices. This is not free market capitalism. This is collectivism. This is the tyranny of the state that the founders tried to protect us from when they wrote the Declaration and the Constitution.
The answer is not more government; they created this financial mess through regulation and intervention in the first place. Yes there is plenty to go around, but the answer is not for government to decide who gets what through social engineering. Go back to the first principle, I have a God given, not state given right, to seek property unencumbered. The market, if left to itself and not a tool of gov’t and their cartels, will adjust. The free market is made up of mutually beneficial transaction, freely entered into by both parties. That is the answer.
Here is a blurb about one of Ed Griffins lectures: Myth & Meaning of Monopoly Capitalism
“A refutation of the popular myth that portrays monopoly as an outgrowth of capitalism. Monopoly is not based on free-enterprise competition, but the escape from it. Monopolists like government regulation because it protects them from competition. Thus, monopoly is the product of collectivism.”
This audio is available here:
http://www.realityzone.com/capitalism.htmlHave we lost all sense of reason? Do we want or neighbor, our governor, our legislature, our president, the UN, the IMF telling us how much we get to earn and how much we get to keep? Remember when the Kings tax collector would show up and exact tribute, at what ever rate the king decided? Do we want to become serfs of the state again? Isn’t that a devolution of culture and society?
What do you perceive to be the essential difference between being a “serf to the state” and being a serf to the oligarchs?
And, by the way, the framers of the Constitution, in their wisdom, left a number of things to be worked out. Circumstances change over time, they recognized.
I see no difference in outcome, except in a Republic, we vote in those who eventually become our masters. A serf has no choice but to accept his fate. Unfortunately, because of ignorance, indifference, blind faith, public education, whatever; the US electorate did not exercise vigilance and has allowed the gov’t to get away with all this. If the federal reserve were abolished, sound money re-established, pare the bureaucracy back to enumerated powers, which would dissolve the privileges and advantages that help the Oligarchy to form; then we could begin the road to recovery and prosperity. It’s not complicated, but it requires will, vision and leadership, all of which are sorely lacking. The most difficult is the will, because that entails the abolishment of every single government program that redistributes wealth. People have become like junkies, addicted to government handouts and that includes a very high % of the population. And yes, this includes every single subsidy to business, in all its forms. Now, some of the social service functions need to be handles at the state and local level; but the federal gov’t is simply not authorized by the constitution to do these things.
David said “And, by the way, the framers of the Constitution, in their wisdom, left a number of things to be worked out. Circumstances change over time, they recognized.”
There is no future circumstance that cannot be understood in light of the eternal principles of unalienable rights and the struggle between Liberty and Tyranny.
Anybody who relies on an old document to protect him from unscrupulous exploiters is in for a big dissapointment. SOme of the Bill of Rights have already been shredded repeatedly over the decades by various manifestations of our government, the most recent being the Bush administration.
The Constitution was meant to be a living document and it was meant to be changed at will by the people, just as the government was meant to be changed whenever the people agreed on that, and not necessarily by election.
Americans lost their will to keep their freedoms a long time ago.And you should drop the super adjectives..liberty and tyranny. You are just mouthing the same old tired phrases that have been used to keep people down for the last hundred years, both here in Central and South America and in the States.
The only ones who argue in favor of tyranny are the rich oligarchy but they call it liberty so as to fool a naive people. I am tempted to say Americans are not naive, rather they are crazy because when you do the same thing over and over, like partcipating in a rigged system, and get the same unwanted results, that is insanity.
At least much of the latin world has finally rejected the North American nonsense andhave gone in a more healthy direction.Edited on Mar 26, 2009 12:16
Well, of course you want to ignore the core argument, which is the forces of Liberty vs the forces of Tyranny. collectivism in all its guises are forms of tyranny, from the soft tyranny that insinuated itself into the US system through such things as over regulation of business, to the classic hard tyranny of such places as the old USSR, China, Cuba, North Korea.
And yes, I am using the logic and argumentation of the essence of the struggle. How about staying on point and stop throwing up straw man arguments and just state that you prefer the form of governments that want the ruling elite to call all the shots and tell everybody what to do?
The yearning to be free is hard wired into human beings. We have been struggling for eons to be free. In America, we finally had a shot at it, but your side is winning at the moment, and our freedoms are disappearing, not because of free market capitalism; but by the forces of collectivism, that seek to concentrate power and privilege for themselves, as they have throughout history.
History says you are wrong about the “yearning for freedom”. People have always preferred a strong leader over the responsibilities of maintaining a democracy.
Every time democracy has been tried, it eventually slips back into an oligarchy. It happened to the Greeks and it has already happened in the U.S. quite a while ago.The only force against oligarchy is socialism. Socialism is an effort to vest ownership and control of the means of production in the community as a whole,..quite the opposite of concentrating power in the hands of a few….and it is an ongoing battle in the world between these two ideologies with no clear victor yet.
If you are living in Costa Rica, you are contributing to socialsim and I congratulate your decison to live here.
Edited on Mar 26, 2009 16:31
People have sought protection from invaders and bandits in all ages, this doesn’t mean they want to be serfs, lorded over by the ruling elite. You are blind to the concentrations of power in socialist and communist countries. America is the only experiment in liberty to the extent we had it. And the descent into oligarchy, which is a form of collectivism, is not the end result of the capitalist system; but the abuse of it by the ruling elite.
I am trusting that the socialist system in Costa Rica is less virulent and that the ambitions of the gov’t are such that they do not descend to the depths that are possible. But, according to the CR constitution, all political power is the province of the state, so we are all living there at the whim of those in power.
I’m still waiting for you to reply to my question about the historical record of the tyranny of socialist and communist regimes?
I’m not one to argue for either communist or capitalist “regimes”. Historically, i just note the governments overthrown by the Russians, Chinese and Cubans, and the unending attacks and attempts at subversion by the so-called Western World aimed at those governments, to include assassinations, outright war and invasion.
Does making note of historical fact make me a commie in your mind? Is making full time the pursuit of mucking in other peoples business equate to your definition of spreading freedom and democracy? Does wielding the sword in the name of the God of your choice make you righteous? Less virulent? I guess Nazi Germany was a socialist country not dominated by the capitalists, ‘eh? How many other countries have dropped atomic bombs, and Grenada? Let’s go back a little further. Trading tea for opium? Conquistadors? The Inquisition? Wow, history is a mutha!I have seen several post where you laud the communist government in Cuba, so I take it that you are of that persuasion. And I unabashedly argue in favor of free market capitalism over any other system. It has produced the most positive advancement for the good of all mankind that no collectivist model can touch. One would have to ignore the positive accomplishments and only focus on the negative.
And I do not argue that the US is perfect. Far from it. I wouldn’t be leaving if it hadn’t become so corrupt/ But I will put the failings of America up against the appalling record of abuse by the collectivists throughout history. The communists have killed 100,000,000 of their own people in their pursuit of the ideal state. check it out here:http://www.monstersandcritics.com/news/usa/news/article_1316649.php/BACKGROUND_100_million_deaths_under_communism
Sorry eldreed, I thought that last post was from sprite. I have not seen any posts from you before, so I don’t know if you support Castro or not.
If every thinking person kept his values in place, and evaluated his OWN leaders (and lifestyle) in relationship to those values, this world would be a better place. How convenient to “unabashedly” endorse a power fulcrum so far out of the understanding of us plebians instead of holding your own duly elected (do I hear groans) leaders to account. Hey, let’s worry about Senor Arias.
So much for your values, just give me a pie in the sky that I can attach my morality to so I can face the day. I hereby cauterize my sense of responsibility so that my agenda can be met.keviyon…. don’t waste your breath… Cuba is a wonderful place with happy people that enjoy a free and open society with a balanced political system that encourages debate and views from all it’s people… even those that don’t agree with the current leaders… they’re more than happy to wait and engage in the democratic election process to make the changes they feel are needed and to replace their leaders as public opinion dictates. They’re also blessed with a free press and media that are unhindered by the government and thus are well informed when making their choices. They also enjoy unlimited access to the internet and are encouraged to seek information that (by some stroke of bad luck) might not be available to them from the open and free press/media and their government.
Before you engage in a debate about Cuba… I thought you might want to have this VALUABLE information available to you!!! 🙂
Edited on Mar 27, 2009 02:09
Has anybody in this discussion ever visited Cuba for any length of time? I have and I stand by my observations about that country and its people and its valiant efforts to stand up against the most powerful and evil force in this hemisphere. Few have done so successfully.
If you have moved from the US to Costa Rica, you have made a choice of socialism over unregulated free market capitalism. I applaud your decisions but critique your hipocrisy if you are railing against the form of government and society in which you
chose to live. Actions speak the loudest and truest, don’t you think?“unregulated free market capitalism.”
Does not exist in the US any more and hasn’t for decades. That is why I am leaving. If true free market capitalism, which requires competition, existed we would not be in the mess we are in now. Again, an oligarchy is a form of collectivism. and I am not moving to Costa Rica because it is socialist, but in spite of it.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
